Paper · 2020 · IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science

Study on the effects of no tillage and perfect tillage on maize growth and biomass production for livestock feed

Amir; Sarintang

13
claims
27
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Abstract Land management techniques in this study are grouped into a full tillage and no tillage practices. Full tillage which generally uses simple tools for heavy equipment is basically aimed at controlling weeds and loosening the soil so that aeration and soil infiltration capacity increases. This study aims to examine the effect of land preparation and land preparation on maize growth and maize production. This research was conducted at the location of farmers in Takalar Regency in the dry season. The effects of the planting system indicate that the system is without soil; plant height (240.6 cm), biomass in cobs (7.3 t / ha), straw weight (22.1 t / ha), cob length (16.6 cm) and corn production (10.1 t/ha ). OL Perfect Land technology results; plant height (239.2 cm), biomass on cob (6.7 t / ha), straw weight (19.1 t / ha), cob length (16.4 cm) and corn production (9.8 t /ha ). The effect of varieties shows that Bima-2 and Bima-3 varieties are higher in the growth and yield components of corn than other varieties. While the interaction effect shows that the Bima-2 variety with the No Grounding planting system gives straw weight (27.6 t / ha) and corn production (13.5 t / ha) higher than the same variety as the fully Soil Cultivation system, namely weight straw (26.6 t / ha) and corn production (13.2 t / ha). The Gumarang variety in the Soil planting system gives a straw weight (18.2 t / ha) and dry shell corn production (7.9 t / ha) while the Perfect Earth planting system gives a straw weight (15.1 t / ha) and dry production shells corn (7.9 t / ha). t / ha) lowest among other interaction treatments. Potential yield of corn biomass is between 15-27 t / ha. The weight of straw produced from corn biomass is generally used as a source of animal feed consisting of stems, leaves and cob. The composition of corn biomass containing cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, ash and extractives with their chemical composition, utilization of stems, leaves and cob for the fulfilment of nutritious livestock feed is very prospective.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under no tillage maize plant height was 240.6 cm versus 239.2 cm under perfect tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
no tillaget0
Outcome
plant heighte0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
240.6 cme0
Qualifier
239.2 cme1
Comparator
perfect tillaget0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“plant height (240.6 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 584–607 · show in text ↑
e1

“plant height (239.2 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 758–781 · show in text ↑
t0

“no tillage and perfect tillage on maize growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under no tillage biomass in cobs was 7.3 t/ha versus 6.7 t/ha under perfect tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
no tillaget0
Outcome
biomass in cobse0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
7.3 t / hae0
Qualifier
6.7 t / hae1
Comparator
perfect tillaget0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“biomass in cobs (7.3 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 609–637 · show in text ↑
e1

“biomass on cob (6.7 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 783–810 · show in text ↑
t0

“no tillage and perfect tillage on maize growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under no tillage straw weight was 22.1 t/ha versus 19.1 t/ha under perfect tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
no tillaget0
Outcome
straw weighte0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
22.1 t / hae0
Qualifier
19.1 t / hae1
Comparator
perfect tillaget0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“straw weight (22.1 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 639–665 · show in text ↑
e1

“straw weight (19.1 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 812–838 · show in text ↑
t0

“no tillage and perfect tillage on maize growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under no tillage cob length was 16.6 cm versus 16.4 cm under perfect tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
no tillaget0
Outcome
cob lengthe0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
16.6 cme0
Qualifier
16.4 cme1
Comparator
perfect tillaget0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cob length (16.6 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–687 · show in text ↑
e1

“cob length (16.4 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–860 · show in text ↑
t0

“no tillage and perfect tillage on maize growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under no tillage corn production was 10.1 t/ha versus 9.8 t/ha under perfect tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
no tillaget0
Outcome
corn productione0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
10.1 t/hae0
Qualifier
9.8 t /hae1
Comparator
perfect tillaget0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“corn production (10.1 t/ha )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–720 · show in text ↑
e1

“corn production (9.8 t /ha )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 865–893 · show in text ↑
t0

“no tillage and perfect tillage on maize growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–70 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The Bima-2 variety was higher in growth and yield components of corn than other varieties.

Material
Bima-2e0
Outcome
growth and yield componentse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
other varietiese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bima-2 and Bima-3 varieties are higher in the growth and yield components of corn than other varieties”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 930–1032 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The Bima-3 variety was higher in growth and yield components of corn than other varieties.

Material
Bima-3e0
Outcome
growth and yield componentse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
other varietiese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bima-2 and Bima-3 varieties are higher in the growth and yield components of corn than other varieties”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 930–1032 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bima-2 under the no-grounding system gave straw weight of 27.6 t/ha versus 26.6 t/ha under full soil cultivation.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Material
Bima-2e0
Treatment
No Grounding planting systeme0
Outcome
straw weighte0
Direction
highere0
Value
27.6 t / hae0
Qualifier
26.6 t / hae0
Comparator
fully Soil Cultivation systeme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bima-2 variety with the No Grounding planting system gives straw weight (27.6 t / ha) and corn production (13.5 t / ha) higher than the same variety as the fully Soil Cultivation system, namely weight straw (26.6 t / ha) and corn production (13.2 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1078–1332 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bima-2 under the no-grounding system gave corn production of 13.5 t/ha versus 13.2 t/ha under full soil cultivation.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Material
Bima-2e0
Treatment
No Grounding planting systeme0
Outcome
corn productione0
Direction
highere0
Value
13.5 t / hae0
Qualifier
13.2 t / hae0
Comparator
fully Soil Cultivation systeme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bima-2 variety with the No Grounding planting system gives straw weight (27.6 t / ha) and corn production (13.5 t / ha) higher than the same variety as the fully Soil Cultivation system, namely weight straw (26.6 t / ha) and corn production (13.2 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1078–1332 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gumarang in the soil planting system gave straw weight of 18.2 t/ha versus 15.1 t/ha under the perfect earth system.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Material
Gumarange0
Treatment
Soil planting systeme0
Outcome
straw weighte0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
18.2 t / hae0
Qualifier
15.1 t / hae0
Comparator
Perfect Earth planting systeme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Gumarang variety in the Soil planting system gives a straw weight (18.2 t / ha) and dry shell corn production (7.9 t / ha) while the Perfect Earth planting system gives a straw weight (15.1 t / ha) and dry production shells corn (7.9 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1338–1579 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gumarang gave the same dry shell corn production of 7.9 t/ha under both planting systems.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Material
Gumarange0
Treatment
Soil planting systeme0
Outcome
dry shell corn productione0
Direction
no_changeinferrede0
Value
7.9 t / hae0
Comparator
Perfect Earth planting systeme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Gumarang variety in the Soil planting system gives a straw weight (18.2 t / ha) and dry shell corn production (7.9 t / ha) while the Perfect Earth planting system gives a straw weight (15.1 t / ha) and dry production shells corn (7.9 t / ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1338–1579 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Potential yield of corn biomass is between 15 and 27 t/ha.

Outcome
Potential yield of corn biomasse0
Value
15-27 t / hae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Potential yield of corn biomass is between 15-27 t / ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1632–1687 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that using stems, leaves and cob of corn biomass for nutritious livestock feed is very prospective.

Outcome
very prospectivee0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“utilization of stems, leaves and cob for the fulfilment of nutritious livestock feed is very prospective”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1948–2052 · show in text ↑

tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

283 papers: 196 positive, 87 negative or no effect

195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

279 papers more in this group

See all 283 papers →

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

1,095 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.